Shades of gray, black, and politics
In a previous post, I asked anybody to point out any Obama campaign ads that were as thoroughly false or misleading as the recent round of McCain ads. Jeff Miller rose to the challenge, pointing out six (1 2 3 4 5 6) Obama ads, all of which could be misleading to one degree or another. One ad had a picture that did not match the text. Others accused McCain of having held positions he had held without mentioning that McCain abandoned those positions after securing the primary. Some suggested that McCain wanted to cut funds for things like education without mentioning that these were part of broader domestic funding cuts. Perhaps the worst of the lot stated that McCain “voted to cut education funding” and listed five votes. Only one of those was for an actual cut in education funding. The others were votes against increases in funding or votes for smaller increases.
With all due respect, I think you’re minimizing these a bit. The Ralph Reed ad is true in the same way that it would be true to run an ad saying with this tagline: ”Hundreds of children are abducted each year, but Barack Obama refused to hold a single hearing on the subject. Who’s he hiding in his basement?” And showing a picture of various businessmen and secret service officers while suggesting that they are lobbyists seems like some kind of slander.
Plus, as I’ve written on this blog before, Obama keeps stating that McCain is seeking to cut taxes for oil companies. This is only true in that he’s seeking to cut the corporate tax rate for all corporations. Look at the text of Obama’s ad:
Announcer: Every time you fill your tank, the oil companies fill their pockets. Now Big Oil’s filling John McCain’s campaign with 2 million dollars in contributions.
Because instead of taxing their windfall profits to help drivers, McCain wants to give them another 4 billion in tax breaks. After one president in the pocket of big oil… We can’t afford another.
Barack Obama… A windfall profits tax on big oil to give families a thousand dollar rebate.A president who’ll stand up for you.
Obama: I’m Barack Obama and I approve this message.
“In the pocket of big oil,” the ad says. That’s absurd. It wouldn’t be any more dishonest if Obama had said, “McCain wants to give tax breaks to companies that kill babies, because he’s in the pocket of child-killers.”
And stepping away from ads, remember Obama’s convention speech, and Obama’s attack on McCain’s conception of the rich. Tell me this wasn’t unfair:
Obama: Now, I don’t believe that Senator McCain doesn’t care what’s going on in the lives of Americans; I just think he doesn’t know. Why else would he define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year?
What McCain actually said at the Saddleback Church forum on Aug. 16 was that he favors low taxes for all income levels. He drew a laugh, then said, “but seriously” as he struggled to make his point:
Pastor Rick Warren, Aug. 16: [G]ive me a number, give me a specific number - where do you move from middle class to rich?
McCain: I don’t want to take any money from the rich – I want everybody to get rich. … So, I think if you are just talking about income, how about $5 million?
(LAUGHTER)
But seriously, I don’t think you can - I don’t think seriously that - the point is that I’m trying to make here, seriously – and I’m sure that comment will be distorted – but the point is that we want to keep people’s taxes low and increase revenues.
That’s pretty deceptive. I mean, McCain said, “I don’t think seriously that,” and that Obama treats it like McCain was serious. If I used inflammatory rhetoric, I’d say that Obama intentionally lied to 42 million people when he said this.
None of this excuses the ads that McCain is running. But Obama’s ads are absolutely terrible and deceptive, so let’s stop pretending that he’s above the fray.
